"You are a bad Belgian and you have signed your own death warrant."

rmsharpe said:
Go on living in your fantasy world, Azadre.

I don't know if you consider yourself an American, but if you do -- we were struck, do you remember? We struck back in Iraq and Afghanistan. Qadaffi is loading in his pants and Lebanon is throwing off Syria's shackles.
Um, Muslims are in control in both of those regions...
 
I'm more and more inclined to believe that a Moslem or someone sympathetic to their various causes may have done this simply to drum up support for them in the Low Countries.
 
Azadre said:
Um, Muslims are in control in both of those regions...
That's because we let them. We could easily strike a deal with Russia or even the EU to split up the Middle East, but we don't, because that isn't beneficial to us.
 
rmsharpe said:
That's because we let them. We could easily strike a deal with Russia or even the EU to split up the Middle East, but we don't, because that isn't beneficial to us.
How Well did Russia do in Checnya?
 
rmsharpe said:
I'm more and more inclined to believe that a Moslem or someone sympathetic to their various causes may have done this simply to drum up support for them in the Low Countries.
Only because you're a Christian nut.
 
rmsharpe said:
That's because we let them. We could easily strike a deal with Russia or even the EU to split up the Middle East, but we don't, because that isn't beneficial to us.
No you couldn't, 'cos the EU wouldn't want to, and Russia couldn't afford to.
 
Azadre said:
Unlike Christians, if a Muslim is struck, he will strike back twice as hard.

I'm curious, nay, completely baffled, as to how this thought originated in your mind and got posted to this thread. Are you saying that Naima Amzil will get her revenge somehow? Or that other Muslims will strike back twice as hard by tormenting two Christians?

And is there truly no legitimate Muslim sense for "forgiving those who trespass against us" even while Christians can either turn the other cheek or take an eye for an eye?

Or am I simply a victim of a drive-by trolling?
 
oh forget it
 
The Last Conformist said:
Yay. This is the sort of thing to convince one that liberal democracy is a bad idea.

Although it has its faults, it's better than a dictatorship run by the nut that sent the letter.
 
Syterion said:
Christianity had that Enlightenment. And forced conversions? From what I've been taught in history, Muslims(in the middle east at least) had been pretty liberal about conversions.

As far as I know Muslims didn't forcibly convert the places they conquered because they had a policy of tax breaks for Muslims, and they didn't want to ruin their tax base.

Azadre said:
Of course, all you need to do is walk around celebrating the death of a prophet by showing him dying then following up by worshipping the very man.... I should wear a gun around my nceck to honor JFK, same logic.

If there was a tolerable picture of JFK being shot, you better beleive that his avid fans would keep it with them.

What are pictures of a martyr without pictures of his death?
 
Sims2789 said:
Although it has its faults, it's better than a dictatorship run by the nut that sent the letter.
Yes, but in a dictorship run by me, the police would have Stasi-style powers to track him down and disappear him.
 
Bozo Erectus said:
Veil hatred continues to sweep through Europe, this time Belgium. Youd have thought that after 9/11 it would be the U.S. behaving this way, not Europe. Is this anti Muslim feeling going to keep growing? What are the root causes of it? Where is Europe heading in regard to Muslims?

ACHTUNG ALL FASCISTS: Go make your own threads:mad:

I live in a neighbourhood with a muslim majority, right here, on a 5 minute walk form the Dutch parliament en ministeries.
I see veils every single day.
And though I am a principle liberal, and thus will never even think of making rules on what people want to wear when they are at home, on the street or in factories, I do have what you might refer to as veil-hatred.

I've analysed it with a VERY open mind, but I don't think anyhting can change my opinion now:

The veil is a symbol of female oppresion, rather than a symbol of religion.
I perfectly understand it is not a black-and-white thing. It can (and thus will) be a very complicated issue in many cases.

Whereas hatred towards religious symbols is wrong, fighting symbols of female oppresion is most defenitely not.

Bozo,
Quite frankly, I think your insinuation that veil hatred must be muslim hatred is quite annoying.
Making fun of calvinist villages were women still wear dresses/long skirts is perfectly political correct here, but when you make fun of the veil, it suddenly puts you in the 'muslims-hatred' corner.

Note: what happened in this factory is of course a sad example of idiocy. It most certainly does not reflect the massive feelings in both Flemmish and Dutch society (has nothing to do with 9/11, was going on longer), against the quite backward aspects of the muslim culture.

And yes:
If people think women without veils should be considered whores, there view is totally backward!
 
article said:
Originally from Morocco, she had done everything possible to integrate into Belgian society - speaking French and Dutch and carrying a Belgian passport.
This is not 100% on topic:
But speaking both French and Dutch is not really a necessity to be integrated in Belgian society. Belgium is not a homogene billingual state, but a federation of two mono-linguistic areas.
 
Riesstiu IV said:
Until Islamic scholars start teaching respect and tolerance towards non-Muslims then I will never have any respect for Islam. Just like I don’t have respect for nutcase Christians like Fred Phelps.
Don't you see the hypocrisy in this statement? "I will never have any respect for Islam" versus "I don't have respect for Christians like [a particular nutjob]."

You're condemning the whole religion of Islam and by implication every single person who follows it, based on the activities and beliefs of the nutjobs. You don't condemn Christianity in the same way due to Phelps, the Crusades, pedophile priests, Timothy McVeigh, the Christian Identity movement, etcetera.

Edit: And I think the people who are trying to separate out dislike of the veil from dislike of Muslims or Islam are missing the point, at least in this case. Nobody makes death threats over one woman choosing a wear a so-called symbol of oppression.

Renata
 
Renata said:
Edit: And I think the people who are trying to separate out dislike of the veil from dislike of Muslims or Islam are missing the point, at least in this case. Nobody makes death threats over one woman choosing a wear a so-called symbol of oppression.

Renata

Well, this specific case is indeed about xenophobia / dislike for Islam. The moron the article writes about is, however, not one of many, but one of very very few.

The general 'fear for Islam' you can see in both Flemmish and Dutch societies most certainly is about the fear for loosing our tolerant values.

That is a reasonable fear. From within the muslim community there is very little self-correcting progress (mayeb off topic, but I think there is the key for the problem). As long as there is a strong correlation between being a muslim and having utter backward philosophies on homosexaulity or the position of women in society, I don't see why the veil is NOT a symbol of these backward philosphies.

We have been fighting here agaisnt the backward christian culture, and won the fight in the 70s.
Now we fight backward muslim culture.
Seems fair to me!
 
Back
Top Bottom